#R11c2 BUG VERIFY HELP
13 messages in this thread
Mark,
I tend to have bad feelings on this bug that you are claiming here because
the DXF is Autodesk's utility. It would seem, on the surface, that the
problem lies with the program on the RS/6000 not writing a compatable file
for the DXF interface.
But I have a suggestion. Did you try to import this DXF into a *NIX version
of AutoCAD ???? This should clear up any problems with the <LF> and the
lower case in the DXF initially, and if it doesn't, it would again point to
the program on the RS/6000………(but you didn't want to hear that, did
you ???)
The next solution would be to write a little program to convert the <LF> to
<CR><LF> and to convert the lower case to upper case to run on the DXF
before importing it to DOS ACAD. If this clears up the problems, you got
the answer, but I really have a feeling that this won't do it.
Papa,
You are correct in pointing out the fact that the AES DXF translator
does not produce a "correct" DXF file. It has *many* *many* bugs, and for
that reason it did not pass our evaluation tests. Accordingly, we did not
purchase it.
Regarding testing the problem files with *NIX ACAD, I cannot (no
access to *NIX ACAD), however, upon receiving my bug report, the Spiker
himself repeated my testing on ACAD 386, ACAD 286, and ACAD on the SUNs, and
he reported back to me that R11 failed on both the DOS 386 version, *and*
the Sun version. The 286 version of R11 did NOT fail, but it also did not
indicate the initial error messages at all. He did not elaborate on what
this might imply about the AUDIT function's state of repair for the 286
version.
See my last messages to Duff and Larry Beck for more info on this.
Cutting to the chase, it's *very* unlikely that we'll see an R11c3
because of *this* bug…unless Adesk is suddenly deluged with many folks
complaining about it. Which is kinda doubtful – to say the least <grin>.
BTW, did you try it for yourself? Oh, and as I said to Duff, the <CR><LF>
stuff wasn't a problem because the Tech support fellow massaged them into
shape before I even tried to bring them into R11/386 <dos>.
There's no doubt that there's a bug in the AUDIT function, but we're
unlikely to see it addressed until R12 rolls off the assembly line.
Regards,
Mark B.
Mark – Just to be sure you're clear on this… THERE'S NO NEED to massage a
Unix-style DXF file (or any other ASCII file read by AutoCAD) into DOS
format for AutoCAD's sake. It reads all formats without the need for user
intervention.
Duff,
Yes, I did understood that from your first message. However, the need
to fix errors in the DXF file in a DOS-based editor did/does make it necessary
to massage the DOS <CR><LF>s into place. Perhaps, since *NIX-based ACAD can
handle this anyway, the <CR><LF> scheme should, at least optionally, be
output from ALL ACAD DXFOUT routines? just for DOS-compatability sake?
Mark Burns – TKLP Inc.
Mark – Get an editor that can write files using LF's or CR/LF's. *NIX versions
of AutoCAD write DXF files in the format that most *NIX text editors/processors
expect them.
-TonyT.
Mark – Although AutoCAD can read ASCII files in any of the various
end-of-line formats, it tries to be a good citizen, and writes such files
using the conventions of the system upon which it's running. Unix style on
Unix, DOS style on DOS, Mac style on Mac…
Duff,
All I'm suggesting is *allowing the user the option to choose* which
End-of-line format to create a DXF file with. I'm not asking you to change
the default mechanisms that you already have in place…I think I know a
little bit better than that by now…<grin> This would permit those users
who work in multiple-OS enviromnents to have a little easier time of it when
sharing DXF files across platforms. Don't change anything else <except the
AUDIT bug> tho, OK?<grin>
Regards,
Mark Burns – TKLP Inc.
Mark,
From Xenix if I do a "doscp" (DOS copy) to send a Xenix ASCII file to a DOS
box, Xenix adds "^M" for each <CR>. When I receive an ASCII file with all
of those messy ^M's, they don't make any difference to Xenix but I use a
global substitute in 'vi' to get rid of them.
Gale
Gale,
Did something I said strike close to a nerve, or are you just
attempting to correct my ignorance on this general subject?<g>
…and XENIX may very well be a bit better at handling the DOS-format
files due to it's PC-based heritage (and long association with DOS files) I
cannot be sure if the same general statements would apply to AIX or not
tho…UNIX/XENIX/AIX is just not <yet> an area of significant expertise for
me. I do intend to rectify that at some point tho. <but then we all know
about "intentions" don't we?<g>>
Mark Burns – TKLP Inc.
Mark,
I'm very sorry if my reply to you appeared hostile. I meant it to be only
informational. My disappointment with the way Autodesk is treating the
Xenix issue is spilling over into my typing.
Gale
Gale!
<grin> No…*I'm* sorry if it appeared to you that I took
umberage!<grin> That last was *supposed* to have been in the nature of a
"playful reposte." Alas, my inferior communications skills strike
again…
Believe me Gale, if I'm ever even slightly upset with ya, you can
rest assured that you will know it!<grin> Also, keeping my own mindset in
view here, I certainly am not going to be the first person to jump down
somebody's throat because they espouse a viewpoint about an ACAD-related
issue. I'm extremely aware that different people bring different viewpoints
to a problem, and 90% of the time people's interpersonal misunderstandings
stem in large part from at least one person's inability or unwillingness to
see the same problem from another's perspective. Of course, that's just my
opinion. I usually try to take what I believe to be the most constructive
course in such situations – continue dialog in hopes of having both/all
parties see the problem from all (known) angles. Then, hopefully, a method
of addressing the problem can be found that meets the needs of everyone
concerned.
I certainly have no cause to be upset with you. Hopefully, the
convers also applies. I am currently unaware of your SCO UNIX/XENIX
concerns, but that area interests me. Could you give me a brief rundown of
what your "bone of contention" with Adesk/SCO is? We may well find ourselves
on common ground…
Regards,
Mark <the long-winded not-TM<grin>> Burns – TKLP Inc.
Mark,
The "bone of contention" is simply that Autodesk is just about to *finally*
ship R11 for SCO UNIX and is ignoring SCO XENIX. My operating system
"upgrade" will cost me more than the AutoCAD upgrade and the money is just
the start of the cost. SCO UNIX is more difficult to manage and administer
and SCO XENIX is better suited to a small concern.
I'm normally a very happy sort so I suppose I need to just shut up and empty
my pockets<g>.
Gale
Gale,
Dos 5 is advertised in Egghead for $59. <grin, ducking, and running>
Dave L.